UKIP’s new secret electoral weapon – their own fantasy third way

When The Boiling Frog wrote earlier this week about how UKIP threatens to lose any in-out referendum for the anti-EU side, he reminded readers that UKIP still does not have any plan for leaving the EU.

On the Sunday Politics, UKIP Councillor Suzanne Evans, even said to Andrew Neil in response to his question about whether the party had a roadmap to leave the EU in the event of an ‘out’ vote, ‘wouldn’t that be great?’.

But an article today in the Financial News (£) might just explain why there is no exit plan for leaving the EU… UKIP is apparently developing a carefully crafted secret weapon that would see the UK stay insidethe Customs Union! Not inside the internal market, but inside the Customs Union and negotiating its own trade agreements:

So what has changed? Why are the money-men and women being lured to the “bloke in the pub” with his Brexit rants and no policies? They are heavyweights too: Crispin Odey, who has in the past hedged his bets by giving money to Ukip and the Tories; Andrew Perloff of Panther Securities and Christopher Mills’ Harwood Capital are also donors; while Andy Brough of Schroders has signed up.

This is why – they are being persuaded that “the man in the pub” is developing a carefully crafted secret weapon to the crude In or Out stance. It is for the UK to stay within the EU’s Customs Union by negotiating its own trade agreements. Under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, any country wanting to exit has two years in which to negotiate new arrangements with the Customs Union. To date, Farage has only hinted at joining a customs union. But Anglo-Sino’s [Stephen] Hill, who privately funds Tim Aker, Ukip policymaker and an MEP candidate, reckons Farage could win this election outright – and many seats at the next election – if he were to reveal that more elegant solutions are under review other than the emotive In-Out one.

If ever there was a moment that confirmed the people around Farage in the upper echelons of UKIP have absolutely no bloody idea what they are talking about, this is it. In spades. Writ large. Ignorance and incompetence on a galactic scale.

For what has been explained above by Margreta Pagano is even more of a fantasy than David Cameron’s renegotiation of powers from Brussels. It is political and economic Neverland, demonstrating UKIP’s ‘thought leaders’ don’t even understand what a Customs Union is. This is underlined by the rationale that is given:

Such a move, says Hill, would counter much of the nonsensical scaremongering from LibDems and Labour that pulling out would lead to the loss of millions of jobs. He has a point: if the UK were to exit but negotiate to stay in the Customs Union, UK plc would be allowed to vote on all trade matters but on an intra-governmental basis, not supranational one.

The beauty of this approach is that by staying in the Customs Union – rather than joining Efta for example – manufacturers can trade duty-free within the Customs Union area: Turkey and Monaco have Customs Union agreements. And the UK has a strong hand to play: the EU exports twice as much in finished goods to the UK as we do to the EU – mainly Germany’s car giants, BMW and Mercedes.

This is utter dreamland. This is a fantasy third way, supposedly not in, supposedly out, but still completely under EU control as today. If the UK exits the EU, it leaves the Customs Union. If it negotiates to stay in the Customs Union then it is by default in the EU. Anything votes on trade matters on an ‘intra-governmental’ basis means internal… to the EU. This Tim Aker plan is cream cheese moon stuff. It is the world of barking cats.

A Customs Union is by definition a supranational entity because decion making is centralised and the ability of member states to strike independent trade deals is removed. One only needs to look at Turkey – out of the EU but in the Customs Union, where the decisions on trade agreements and tariffs are made in Brussels and handed down to Ankara to implement. That is not independence. In the Customs Union the trade deals and common tariffs are negotiated and struck by the EU on behalf of all member states and all member states have to apply them. That is where we already are today.

Vote UKIP for a brighter new yesterday is a phrase that becomes more accurate by the day.

There is no way a member state can go off and sign its own deals because all other member states in the Customs Union have to agree with it and adopt it. Anything else would mean there is no Customs Union at all – in effect the EU would be bringing itself to an end. Like that’s going to happen. Any legal matters in the Customs Union get resolved at the European level in Luxembourg, and under this staggeringly idiotic plan that would have to remain the same, which means the UK courts would not become supreme.

Following this plan, UKIP would be contradicting its own long stated aim for the UK to be outward looking and able to strike its own trade deals with other countries around the world on our own terms. It would be tearing up the notion of UK courts being the sole arbeiter of UK related matters. Its promises on immigration, to stop the free movement of people, could never be delivered. It would consign the UK to maintaining the status quo of trade agreements and tariffs being set for us rather than by us.

In short, if UKIP were to adopt this as policy then forget Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats, UKIP would be the party of in. Their fantasy third way is delusional rubbish. And to think, UKIPpers look up to these idiots, laud them and declare I should be supporting and assisting them.

Nigel Farage told John Humphrys on Radio 4’s Today programme that he would do a deal with the devil to get an EU referendum. Why bother when UKIP is considering a plan that keeps the UK in the EU while only pretending to be independent? This isn’t a case of good ol’ Nige not doing some detail, this is a case of failing to understand the basics.

A policy of ‘out’ that really means ‘in’ should defy belief. But this is UKIP and no amount of crass stupidity should surprise anyone any longer. If you plan to vote UKIP because you want to leave the EU, you may want to think again.

OK. I couldn’t read the original article but the citing of Monaco and Turkey would suggest no confusion and they actually mean what they say.

Sigh.

Well….[positive mode] that suggests they are starting to shuffle away from Brexit as a binary process (sudden repeal of ECA) and beginning to look at it in terms of a journey. And in that very narrow sense, it is a good thing. But they seriously need to reach out to Richard, even if painful for them to do so. I might try giving Tim Aker a kick.

If you don’t laugh, you’ll only throw the computer out the window and swan dive after it…

Seriously though, you are being much too polite.

I have had some not unkind things to say about UKIP in the face of the MSM “barrage”, but this really takes the biscuit. What a pathetic bunch of witless, dribbling no-hopers. Reading this, one is even minded to join in with Dan Hodges in giving them a good kick, if just to put as much distance as possible between genuine anti-EU, pro-British, pro-sovereignty campaigners and these ignorant, “controlled opposition” incompetents.

… The one thing that gives me pause is the fact that when Cleggo was waffling on about “three million jobs” and we were all screaming at the television, “Norway, Norway, NORWAY!! FFS!!!!”, Farage made a very clear statement about the undesireability of a Customs Union, which he described as a “19th century” idea.

Is it possible that The Great Leader has not pre-approved this speculation about “doing a deal” with the City, and the journos are reaching because (for the time being) anything UKIP sells paper/draws traffic?

Lost Leonardo I suspect your last paragraph about non approved speculation is the telling point. In the absence of a hard, credible plan, the troops who are now facing tough questions, have no choice but to abandon whatever campaign discipline they have and go off reservation giving non approved answers whilst the boss is boozing and smoking his way round photo ops. The result is they demonstrate vital misunderstandings about a battleground they chose to fight on.

Laws enacted by parliament are only given the force of law with consent of the governed.Common law trumps statute law! Why has no barrister ever proved otherwise? Follow the money! Delusional I may be but I refuse to be a slave.

“Laws enacted by parliament are only given the force of law with consent of the governed.”

And the consent of the governed has been since 1973 to vote for parties (and in a referendum) to remain members. Parliament is sovereign…it is the law and it can do what it likes. And this case it has done so with consent of the people.

I sincerely hope that many a year passes before I accidentally read anything as pig-ignorant as Don McCarron’s again.

Everyone who comes here knows who writes it, and everyone knows of Richard North’s pieces as well. They don’t need to attach their names because their informed thoughts on the euro-sceptic cause screams from every word.

Presumably, you think UKIP is an anti-EU political party? A joke in itself.

Undeniably believe that which you said. Your favorite justification seemed to be on the net the easiest thing to be aware
of. I say to you, I definitely get annoyed while people consider
worries that they just do not know about. You managed to hit
the nail upon the top and also defined out the whole thing without
having side effect , people could take a signal. Will likely be back to get more.
Thanks